I just did my first semi-long IFR flight in the TBM to test the aircraft functionality and the Live Weather system. The flight was from KELM to KBOS at FL270, flight plan was CFB RKA PONCT.JFUND2 with a transition to the ILS 22R approach.
Since this flight was in US airspace, I did itknowing that there would be no surface or aloft winds provided by Live Weather (and indeedthere were not), but I wanted to see how the rest of the Live Weather functions would play out, and especially wanted to check temperatures aloftagainst the NOAA upper level forecast.
Though I am almost certain that the Live Weathercomes from a forecast model and not real-time observations, on this particular flight, the predictive weather was actually very very close to real time conditions thoughout. On departure from KELM, the METAR was giving a surface temperature of 31C and pressure 29.93 with scattered clouds at 6000 feet. In the sim I had 30C, 29.91 and there were indeed scatteredcumulus clouds which proved to be based at 7200 feet on climb out.
I started cold and dark with the default fuel and payload. I did not use the simulated ATC.
I loaded my flight plan intoForeflight, and tracked the aircraft position enrouteusing XMapsy to interface between MSFS and Foreflight.I loaded the Boston JFUND2 STAR, ILS22L and KBOS taxi chartsin Foreflight. I also enabled the Foreflight real-time NEXRAD radar and enhanced satellite overlays.
Overall the aircraft performed magnificently. I do not have a TBM POH, and do not know (or care)to “obsess“ overwhat precisetorque/rpm combos would be realistic in this model. I just simply...flew it. I used whatever torque was necessaryto obtain a reasonable climb rate and speed, cruise speed and descent rate and speed,and everything worked out fine.
In terms of overall aircraft handling and autopilot and systems functionality, I think this is one of the better, if not best, high-performance modelsin MSFS at this time.
I hand flew the departure, on-course turn and initial climb. Once I was established on the plotted course line to CFB, I turned the autopilot on, and activated FMS NAV tracking with FLC as the vertical mode. I climbed at 150 knots indicated airspeed which of course gave steadily increasing true airspeed as altitude increased.In FLC mode, climb rate was around 2600 FPM right up to top-of-climb.
Once level at FL270, I let the aircraft accelerate to 210 knots IAS, then throttled back to maintain that speed. This gave a true airspeed of 315 knots.
I checked the OAT passing CFB and ALB and compared it to the upper level prediction in Foreflight, and they were within 2 degrees of the NOAA forecast: -13 (MSFS) vs -14 (NOAA) at FL210,and -25 (MSFS) vs -27 (NOAA) at FL270,
It would appear the the MeteoBlue injection of forecasted temperatures aloft is working fine. If they could just get the upper wind component working in the US,this entire Live Weather testwould have been close to perfect.
The autopilottracked the entire enroute segment, STAR, approach transition and ILS perfectly. Since Foreflight has geo-referenced approach charts, I was able to verify the XMapsy-generatedaircraft position on the actual chart against the MFD display, and they corresponded perfectly. ILS localizerand GS tracking were also perfect in APP mode.
Since VNAV does not yet work in the TBM,I had to performthe descent on the STAR manuallyusing VS mode, insuring that I met the STAR altitude constraints, and it worked fine.
In terms of clouds, The Foreflight satellite and NEXRAD overlaysshowed increasing clouds over Massachusetts and a broken line of thunderstorms south of Boston, extending back westward over Rhode Island and Connecticut, and that is exactly what I saw out the window, and on the radar. Approaching Albany the scattered cloud layer gradually changed to broken with areas of overcast. The thunderstorm cells were in almost exactly thesame locations as shown on the Foreflight overlay. If this is indeed from a model forecast, in this case,the model’s prediction of where the the clouds and storms would form was right onthe money.
Also, credit where credit is due. Though many of the avionics in the default aircraft are somewhat limited in functionality, I have to say that the emulation of NEXRAD radar on the G-3000 MFD in the TBM is astonishingly good -every bit as good as the real G-3000 in this area.
Not every G-3000 feature is working, but I think the TBM at present has the most complete and refined G-xxxx implementation in the default fleet.
Though Boston Logan is not listed as one of the custom handcrafted airports, it obviously received extra human attention during the creation of the MSFS world, because as far as I could could see, all taxiway designators and signswere accurate.
Overall, the entire flight, start-to-finish was very enjoyable. At the moment I think the TBM will be my go-to turboprop for exploring the MSFS world.
And, as far as I’m concerned, any claim that “you can’t do a proper IFR flight in MSFS” is a load of codswallop.